Tag Archives: planned parenthood

Promised objectivity, Americans receive Planned Parenthood ideology

From HLI America, part of Human Life International, a report on how the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) used information provided by the Women’s Preventive Services committee of the Institute of Medicine (IOM, part of the National Academy of Sciences) to further their political pro-abortion agenda by insisting that including contraceptives in government-mandated health care is medically necessary, when objective evidence shows that it isn’t.

Virtually all of the Women’s Preventive Services committee members are affiliated in some way with Planned Parenthood or NARAL.

From HLI America:

… But these eleven members—out of a total of sixteen—demonstrate a more than casual commitment to the furthering of the abortion lobby. In fact, according to information available from the public record, a total of $116,500 has been donated to pro-choice organizations and candidates by these committee members. What is more, public records show that not one of the sixteen committee members has financially supported a political candidate who is politically anti-abortion. Whatever one thinks of the relevant issues, one would be hard pressed to argue that this IOM committee is politically non-partisan. This committee was purportedly assembled for the very purpose of providing outside, objective, and expert advice to the policy-making HHS; as the above roll call demonstrates, however, the committee was anything but a balanced sampling of experts….

The committee held three “open information-gathering sessions” to receive expert testimony regarding the preventive services that should be mandated and funded. However, nearly all the invited speakers were known advocates of contraception and abortion on demand. In a press release, Michael O’Dea notes:

At both meetings, the invited speakers represented organizations which advocate coverage of contraception, without cost sharing of expenses. Those organizations include the Guttmacher Institute, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the Association of Women’s Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses, Planned Parenthood, The Kaiser Family Foundation and the Society for Family Planning.

Furthermore, there was not one representative from the Catholic health care system, despite the fact that, taken together, it constitutes the single largest provider of health care in our country. Representatives of the pro-life and pro-family organizations (who were forced to seek for themselves permission to speak) were relegated to the brief public comments portion at the end of the day.

This relegation is not insignificant, for though the use of contraception by American women during child-bearing years is nearly universal, support for publicly funded contraception is not. As indicated by a recentRasmussen poll, 46% of Americans do not support the committee’s recommendation, while only only 39% of Americans believe that contraception should be covered free of charge. This diversity in viewpoints should have been reflected both in the makeup of the committee and of the speakers invited to testify at the hearings. Instead, there was a built-in bias in support of the provision of contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs….

The central claim of the report, as it is bears on Recommendation 5.5, is “that greater use of contraception within the population produces lower unintended pregnancy and abortion rates nationally” (pg. 92). In support of this claim, the report cites only two sources—one of which is a non-peer-reviewed advocacy report. This spurious source was published by the Guttmacher Institute, the former research arm of Planned Parenthood, and a strong advocate for abortion and contraception. One reason for this dearth of evidence is simple: numerous studies show that greater access to oral contraception and emergency contraception does not in fact reduce unintended pregnancies or abortion….

Read it all. (H/t Stand Firm)

Sr. Carol Keehan thanks pro-choice group in private e-mail

Surprised? I’m not. (Well, actually I am a little–that Sr. Carol Keehan, president of the Catholic Health Association, didn’t respond to the pro-life emails as well). From LifeSiteNews.com:

After a person posing as a pro-choice leader thanked her for defending reproductive rights against the U.S. Catholic bishops, Sr. Carol Keehan of the Catholic Health Association thanked the individual and encouraged her group to take a proposed donation to CHA and instead use it to benefit a “poor woman” in CHA’s honor.

The pro-life activist behind the e-mail says Keehan didn’t respond to e-mails with an overt pro-life point of view sent from several e-mail addresses, but got a very different response when posing as a pro-choice leader praising her for defending birth control.

The individual sent a message from the fake pro-choice group “Riverside for Choice” on Sunday thanking Sr. Keehan for protecting access to birth control and for her “willingness to not be intimidated by people like the catholic [sic.] bishops who oppose choice in women’s health.”

“On behalf of all the women and men of Riverside for Choice I would like to thank you for protecting the rights of all women to have free access to essential health services including the contraceptives that allow us to control our own health and bodies,” the individual, posing as “Jenna Wagner” of “Riverside for Choice,” said in an e-mail exchange with Sr. Keehan forwarded to LifeSiteNews.com (LSN). “Wagner” also requested information on how to send a donation to CHA.

“Thanks so much, it would please me if you would use the money for a poor woman in California,” was Sr. Keehan’s response the next day, signed “Keep praying, Sr Carol.”…

LSN asked why Riverside for Choice, which appears to specifically promote artificial birth control, was encouraged to spend funds in CHA’s honor. Sr. Keehan responded, “I asked them to use it for a woman who was poor, I did not ask them to use it for reproductive health.”

Sr. Keehan and CHA have become the fulcrum of the intensifying controversy regarding the Obama administration’s plan to require Catholic employers to pay for sterilizations, contraception, and abortifacient birth control drugs such as the “week-after” pill, Ella. The White House flaunted support from CHA on Friday when it announced an “accommodation” to the mandate that has since been soundly denounced by the U.S. bishops as inadequate. Media outlets then juxtaposed CHA’s name beside Planned Parenthood‘s to give the impression that the two sides of the debate agreed to the arrangement….

The sender of the e-mail, who wished to remain anonymous, told LifeSiteNews.com that the faux pro-choice e-mail address was used after other e-mails were ignored.

“I sent her numerous e-mails from a pro-life point of view and she did not respond, so I wondered if she would respond in a positive way to an e-mail from an abortion supporter and she sure did,” said the sender.

“I was most disturbed by her asking a clearly pro-abortion group to use their money for a ‘poor woman’ knowing a pro-abortion group would use it for abortion,” the sender said…

Read it all.

Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast: Billing the gov’t for abortion-related services?

From the Lufkin (TX) News:

Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast is a defendant in a federal lawsuit after a former Lufkin clinic employee alleged a multi-million-dollar billing scheme….

The updated complaint, filed in October 2011, alleges that while [Karen] Reynolds [former employee] was employed as a health center assistant, she was instructed by the organization to maximize billing revenue when the government was fitting the bill through Medicaid and the Women’s Health Program.

She claims this was the procedure in all 12 Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast locations across Texas and Louisiana.

The suit alleges that, in addition to falsifying patient records, billing the government for unwarranted services and services not covered by Medicaid, Planned Parenthood tacked on services patient did not receive….

Read it all, and read the entire complaint is here, thanks to Jill Stanek. From the complaint:

Fraudulent Patient Chart Documentation to Obtain Reimbursement for Unqualified Services

30. Defendant PPGC also trained its employees to create fraudulent and misleading patient chart entries so as to obtain reimbursement for services for which WHP and Medicaid would otherwise not allow payment. One notable example of this practice relates to PPGC policies for obtaining payment for abortion-related services. WHP, Medicaid, and some other government programs do not allow payment for abortion-related services including “follow-up visits” after an elective abortion procedure. The following is a direct quote from a staff meeting memorandum given to clinic employees January 22, 2009:

We must work these clients in! This visit is self-pay. Quote the self-pay price then ask if she needs any other services such as birth control. If she is interested, screen for WHP or Title XX and offer the WWE [Well Woman Exam]. If the client is getting on birth control make this the focus of the visit and put a note in the chief complaints that the client had a surgical or medical abortion “x” weeks ago.
(Emphasis added).

31. A second memorandum given to employees in February 2009, in preparation for a Department of State Health Services audit, was even more explicit in instructing employees on how to fraudulently bill WHP, Medicaid, and other government programs for post-abortion patient visits, including an express instruction to document in a patient chart that the reason for the patient’s visit was to have the Well Woman Exam when in truth the patient had clearly indicated the purpose of the visit was a post-abortion follow-up.

On the telephone – if client requests post-ab check, tell her that service is a self-pay service and quote price. Ask if she wants other services during the visit – especially a birth control method. If yes, screen her for WHP or Title XX eligibility for the birth control part of the visit.

Make sure that if the visit is being paid for by Title XX, Medicaid, or WHP that it is a birth control focused visit with a note in the subjective section that the client has an abortion “x” weeks ago. Example: Client here for WWE and to start on “x” BCM. States had surgical (or medical) abortion “x” weeks ago.
(Emphasis in original).

Trial is set for April, 2013.

Susan G. Komen: does she or doesn’t she?

Okay, this has gotten incredibly confusing–full of conflicting stories and vague press releases, so at this point, for me, I’m requesting a refund of the donation I sent the Susan G. Komen Foundation and will wait this out.

Here are some links–see if you can make sense of it all:

CatholicVote.org may be right in that this is not a complete reversal of their decision to stop funding Planned Parenthood by Susan G. Komen. All I know is that the MSM is sure reporting it as if it were–celebrations galore that PP is getting more Komen money. This will teach me to contribute to an organization before I really know what they’re doing.

After cutting ties with Planned Parenthood, Komen donations up 100 percent

Well, good. From the Daily Caller:

In the wake of this week’s announcement that Susan G. Komen for the Cure will no longer be awarding grants to Planned Parenthood, the breast cancer organization’s donations have gone up 100 percent in the last two days.

On a Thursday conference call Nancy Brinker, the founder and CEO of the Komen Foundation, told reporters that the organization is “singularly focused” on combating breast cancer, and that the politics of the decision to stop funding Planned Parenthood has been distracting from their mission.

Nevertheless, since cutting ties, Brinker announced that Komen’s donations have gone up in the last two days — by 100 percent.

“Our donations are up 100 percent in the past two days. With all of the emotion around these issues — which we understand, we get emotional too, we do this every single day of our lives,” Brinker said, explaining that they do not make decisions to be popular, they make them to fight cancer….

Read it all.

L.A. Times unhappy with Komen

Well, that didn’t take long. The L.A. Times story by Shari Roan takes the Susan G. Komen for the Cure to task for daring to disaffiliate from Planned Parenthood (and no, I never link to PP’s site):

In what looks to be a break between two organizations dedicated to women’s health, a national breast cancer awareness group said it would stop providing funds to Planned Parenthood centers for breast cancer examinations and other breast health services.

So right away, this is being presented as a conflict between two groups “dedicated to women’s health” instead of between a group that provides funding for cancer research and a group that makes most of its money by performing abortions.

Susan G. Komen for the Cure, a leader in fundraising for breast cancer research and famous worldwide for its iconic pink ribbon, said Tuesday that it was halting all partnerships with Planned Parenthood affiliates because of recently adopted criteria that forbid it from funding any organization under government investigation….

Komen has a long history of providing funding to various Planned Parenthood affiliates for such services as manual breast exams and referrals for mammograms and biopsies to check suspicious lumps for cancer. Although that money is not used for abortions, the Komen Foundation may have yielded to demands from antiabortion groups to sever its ties to Planned Parenthood….

Over the last five years, Planned Parenthood has provided about 4 million breast exams and referrals for 70,000 mammograms nationwide. Funding from Komen covers about 170,000 of the breast exams and 6,400 mammogram referrals, [Cecile Richards, PP’s president] said. Although mammograms and biopsies are referred out, Planned Parenthood doctors manage their patients’ cases….

In other words, PP provides no breast screenings–they act as a middleman with referrals to screenings. And notice how no abortion numbers are given.

Antiabortion groups lauded the decision and described it as the result of years of lobbying from Americans who oppose abortion….

Read it all, and note the “human interest” stories about those who might lose PP dollars but none from those agreeing with Komen’s decision. Maybe now Susan G Komen for the Cure will begin to report honestly on the studies that show a link between abortion and breast cancer.

Komen for the Cure abandons Planned Parenthood funding

Excellent, excellent, excellent news! Now I can go back to buying “pink things” in the grocery store, sponsoring friends when they walk for the cure, etc. Good move by the Susan G. Komen Foundation:

The largest funder of breast cancer research in the nation has ended its controversial ties with Planned Parenthood. Susan G. Komen for the Cure has announced that it is shutting the door on funding the abortion giant after seven years of pressure from pro-life Americans.

Komen spokeswoman Leslie Aun explained that “the cutoff results from the charity’s newly adopted criteria barring grants to organizations that are under investigation by local, state or federal authorities,” according to Fox News. Last year a U.S. House committee announced that it was investigating Planned Parenthood to determine whether the abortion organization handles criminal conduct properly, or has mishandled federal funding to pay for abortions.

Komen has removed a document on their website defending their funding of Planned Parenthood.  As well, a new statement on the site dated November 11, 2011 describes their policy not to fund research involving human embryonic stem cells.  The statement notes that Komen funds stem cell research only where the stem cells are “derived without creating a human embryo or destroying a human embryo.”…

Read it all, and consider letting the foundation know they are supported:

Pro-life leaders are calling on supporters to rally to the defense of the Susan G. Komen Foundation as the organization is being barraged with criticism from pro-abortion advocates in the wake of its decision to cut off funds to Planned Parenthood.

Austin Ruse, president of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-Fam), who has been in touch with Komen advisors since yesterday, told LifeSiteNews that as of last night Komen had received 2,000 e-mails from Planned Parenthood backers and only 64 from pro-lifers….

To thank Komen, go their contact page here. To donate, go here.